February 22, 2011

All are welcome. Wednesday, February 23, 2011. 6-8 pm, Room 2260 at the UW Law School:

This academic forum seeks to provide insights into the dramatic developments that have followed the introduction of the Governor’s Budget Repair Bill from an historical, legal and political perspective. All are welcome.

Speakers:
Professor Carin Clauss, Law School
Professor Donald Downs, Political Science
Professor Will Jones, History
Professor Andrew Coan, Law School
Professor David Cannon, Political Science
Professor Neill DeClercq, School for Workers, UW Extension

Chair:
Professor Heinz Klug, UW Law School

It's called a "teach-in" in the email that was sent around but a "forum" at the law school website.

I hearken back to the idiocy of the last wave of teach-ins, at the start of the war in Iraq. What does a bunch of ignorant, lefty professors stroking the common prejudices of their community have to do with teaching or learning?

I hope the history prof has some sense of failures of socialism by government fiat. Russia is the first then there is Argentina among others Hopefully they will look at how countries have declined when a socialist government rules.There are examples of semi successful socialism but they are within the parameters of a free capitalistic society. Large corporations and churches such as the Roman Catholic Church are examples of semi successful common welfare, commonly held.

You guys have some serious problems. I mean, jumping all over these professors without knowing anything about them just shows how ignorant all of you people are. I don't know about any of the non-law professors, but I'm sure that AA will attest (as will I) that Clauss, Coan and Klug are all brilliant.

I'll be there tomorrow, although I'm always interested to see what Klug is going to say...he was an exile of South Africa during apartheid for over a decade before returning to help the government. Not quite sure what he'll be talking about...

It sounds dopey, no matter how distinguished (doubtful!) these guys are.

Goffman did a lecture on lectures that probably accounts for it, in Forms of Talk

"The lecturer and the audience join in affirming a single proposition. They join in affirming that organized talking can reflect, express, delineate, protray - if not come to grips with - the real world, and that, finally, there is a real, structured, somewhat unitary world out there to comprehend. (After all, that's what distinguishes lectures from stints at the podium openly designed as entertainments.) And here, surely, we have the lecturer's real contract. Whatever his substantive domain, whatever his school of thought, and whatever his inclination to piety or impiety, he signs the same agreement and he serves the same cause: to protect us from the wind, to stand up and seriously project the assumption that through lecturing, a meaningful picture of some part of the world can be conveyed, and that the talker can have access to a picture worth conveying.

It is in this sense that every lecturer, merely by presuming to lecture before an audience, is a functionary of the cognitive establishment, actively suporting the same position: I repeat, that there is structure to the world, that this structure can be perceived and reported, and therefore, that speaking before an audience and listening to a speaker are reasonable things to be doing, and incidentally, of course, that the auspices of the occasion had warrant for making the whole thing possible."

Who doesn't know in advance that it's going to be a self-congratulatory waste of time.

The law school hosts weekly panel lectures like this on essentially whatever is relevant. Just looking at any email from the SBA shows that. In this case, what's happening in our own city is very relevant. The law professors will talk about the law--and you can bet they'll be quite knowledgeable on it.

Again, I'll point to ignorance. You people commenting don't go to the law school and certainly have no idea how these talks are normally presented. Again, I'll point to AA, should she choose to comment...pretty sure she can attest to the normalcy of these chats.

I'm not going to claim that it represents brilliance by any means, but the following statement by one of the panelists (Donald Downs, political science prof.) on the topic of academic freedom at least indicates the presence of some basic cognitive ability and a fair amount of intellectual courage in the contemporary university setting:

Professional responsibility requires that instructors and researchers abide by basic standards of intellectual integrity; they must not seek to indoctrinate students; and they must not present propagandistic or fraudulent material as truthful.

I'd like to see that quote posted in every Wisconsin public-school teachers' lounge.

Well, Professor, I can only hope you will be there with your video camera so that you can share the "teaching" with your readers. I have no doubt that the proceedings will be educational in the full sense of the word.

Look, I am by no means a liberal, but I think that I have one very distinguishing characteristic from all of you: I actually attend this law school. They have panelist discussions like this EVERY single week, both sides are almost always presented, and the moderator does a good job.

Was "teach-in" a good choice of words in the email? No, but they changed it on the law school website. I'm guessing the SBA sent it out to attract more law students to come--UW [obviously] leans to the left, so this will definitely get the lecture hall full.

Did they (not the participants, perhaps) selectively change the label to appeal to the crowd who thinks what they have been doing the past week by not showing up for work and influencing the students improperly about their shenanigans is a noble thing?

So of course it has to be a "teach-in" because many of these younger teachers and protesters completely missed the 60s and so wanted to be at Woodstock. And setting Columbia on fire ...

Teach-ins have been held for decades, but the most outrageous was after 9-11. The first thought of lefty professors was to prevent students from assessing any blame to terrorists as this might place them in agreement with the right. This in turn might lead them to explore whether the right really is the silly caricature leftists pretend it is. They immediately held classes to review the leftist talking points, essentially that it was all America's fault. Back when I was on campus teach ins were the same.

It's hard not to suspect this will be in the same tradition, especially given all the hyperbole the leftist unions are spouting.

Jim says..."I'll be there tomorrow, although I'm always interested to see what Klug is going to say...he was an exile of South Africa during apartheid for over a decade before returning to help the government. Not quite sure what he'll be talking about..."

This is not a supporting fact for the remainder of your argument. He has no particular expertise, but was invited anyway. Why, because of his impeccable leftist credentials?

Marshal, why even bother attempting to argue with you? You're obviously so set in your bizarre and misinformed ways that there's simply no point. "Lefty professors" trying to avoid students assessing blame to terrorists? I don't know what kind of bizarro world you're living in, but I can't remember that happening.

You really enjoy making assumptions, which I suppose is fine...even if they're completely wrong. Klug is not a speaker at this event; he's a moderator. Althouse will attest, as can I, that these events are generally very, very well-presented and do a good job of conveying both sides. I have no doubt that this is what's going to happen later today. I find your partisanship both appalling and, in many ways, sick. Your absolute hatred against "the left" is so extreme that it seems pointless to even attempt to reason with you.

I have a question for everyone who reads this. If someone put a gun to your head and said : "I'm going to ask you one question about something you have no direct knowledge of except by dint of reputation and if you get it wrong I'm going to blow your brains out. And the question is: 'The odds are that the LS faculty forum/teach-in will provide nothing but the usual lefty academic slant--True or False?"

How would you, dear reader, answer?

"The race does not always go to the swift, nor the contest to the strong--but that's the way to bet." ------------Damon Runyon